Enough already with the red- light camera debate. Each side is missing the point of the other. Red-light cameras, just like guns or alcohol, are not inherently bad. The fault lies in the manner in which the devices ares used.
Does anyone really think deterring reckless drivers running red lights is bad? I doubt that anyone does. Clearly it is in the public interest to prevent such actions that can and often do lead to untold grief and suffering of innocent drivers.
If the cameras are used to cite such egregious behavior, then indeed use them to cite such violations and levy a substantial fine. I don’t think that $124 is enough. If the cameras reduce the incidence of these reckless actions, then by all means, support the camera’s use.
However, if the cameras are used to levy a $124 fine (reduced if you make an appearance in Fife Municipal Court, as I did) merely because you came to a complete stop, and using your turn signal made an otherwise legal turn, with the exception of stopping a foot or two beyond the vehicle stop line; then this is a misuse of what could be a valuable and life-saving device.
Again, the device is not inherently bad, but the manner in which it is often used is. Keep the device and refine its use in support of the stated purpose, reducing the incidence of people running red lights.